Measurement of coronary calcium scores by electron beam computed tomography or exercise testing as initial diagnostic tool in low-risk patients with suspected coronary artery disease

We determined the efficiency of a screening protocol based on coronary calcium scores (CCS) compared with exercise testing in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD), a normal ECG and troponin levels. Three-hundred-and-four patients were enrolled in a screening protocol including CCS by electron beam computed tomography (Agatston score), and exercise testing. Decision-making was based on CCS. When CCS≥400, coronary angiography (CAG) was recommended. When CCS<10, patients were discharged. Exercise tests were graded as positive, negative or nondiagnostic. The combined endpoint was defined as coronary event or obstructive CAD at CAG. During 12±4 months, CCS≥400, 10–399 and <10 were found in 42, 103 and 159 patients and the combined endpoint occurred in 24 (57%), 14 (14%) and 0 patients (0%), respectively. In 22 patients (7%), myocardial perfusion scintigraphy was performed instead of exercise testing due to the inability to perform an exercise test. A positive, nondiagnostic and negative exercise test result was found in 37, 76 and 191 patients, and the combined endpoint occurred in 11 (30%), 15 (20%) and 12 patients (6%), respectively. Receiver-operator characteristics analysis showed that the area under the curve of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85–0.93) for CCS was superior to 0.69 (95% CI: 0.61–0.78) for exercise testing (P<0.0001). In conclusion, measurement of CCS is an appropriate initial screening test in a well-defined low-risk population with suspected CAD

A COMPARISON OF INTERNAL MAMMARY ARTERY AND SAPHENOUS-VEIN GRAFTS AFTER CORONARY-ARTERY BYPASS-SURGERY - NO DIFFERENCE IN 1-YEAR OCCLUSION RATES AND CLINICAL OUTCOME

Background Superior patency rates for internal mammary artery (IMA) grafts compared with vein coronary bypass grafts have been demonstrated by retrospective studies. This difference may have been affected by selection bias of patients and coronary arteries for IMA grafting. Methods and Results To estimate the difference between IMA and vein grafts, we analyzed graft patency data of 912 patients who entered a randomized clinical drug trial. In this trial, 494 patients received both IMA and vein grafts (group 1) and 418 only vein grafts (group 2). Occlusion rates of IMA grafts and IMA plus vein grafts in group 1 were compared with those of vein grafts in group 2. Multivariate analysis was used to compare occlusion rates of IMA and vein grafts while other variables related to graft patency were controlled for. In addition, 1-year clinical outcome was assessed by the incidence of myocardial infarction, thrombosis, major bleeding, and death. Occlusion rates of distal anastomoses in group 1 versus group 2 were 5.4% (IMA grafts) versus 12.7% (vein grafts) (P Conclusions The observed difference in 1-year occlusion rates between IMA and vein grafts can be explained by a maldistribution of graft characteristics by selection of coronary arteries for IMA grafting rather than being ascribed to graft material. One-year clinical outcome is not improved by IMA grafting

A COMPARISON OF INTERNAL MAMMARY ARTERY AND SAPHENOUS-VEIN GRAFTS AFTER CORONARY-ARTERY BYPASS-SURGERY - NO DIFFERENCE IN 1-YEAR OCCLUSION RATES AND CLINICAL OUTCOME

Background Superior patency rates for internal mammary artery (IMA) grafts compared with vein coronary bypass grafts have been demonstrated by retrospective studies. This difference may have been affected by selection bias of patients and coronary arteries for IMA grafting. Methods and Results To estimate the difference between IMA and vein grafts, we analyzed graft patency data of 912 patients who entered a randomized clinical drug trial. In this trial, 494 patients received both IMA and vein grafts (group 1) and 418 only vein grafts (group 2). Occlusion rates of IMA grafts and IMA plus vein grafts in group 1 were compared with those of vein grafts in group 2. Multivariate analysis was used to compare occlusion rates of IMA and vein grafts while other variables related to graft patency were controlled for. In addition, 1-year clinical outcome was assessed by the incidence of myocardial infarction, thrombosis, major bleeding, and death. Occlusion rates of distal anastomoses in group 1 versus group 2 were 5.4% (IMA grafts) versus 12.7% (vein grafts) (P Conclusions The observed difference in 1-year occlusion rates between IMA and vein grafts can be explained by a maldistribution of graft characteristics by selection of coronary arteries for IMA grafting rather than being ascribed to graft material. One-year clinical outcome is not improved by IMA grafting